eAssessment: Who's Involved?

Lianne Hutchings, Programme Administrator eAssessment: Who’s involved? lhutchings@bournemouth.ac.uk David Hopkins, Learning Technologist The Business School, Bournemouth University dhopkins@bournemouth.ac.uk So there are tutors and students, but who else? • Report, Case Study, Essay software (Turnitin) to aid the marking and feedback ASSIGNMENT SUBMISSION • Collaboration (e.g. Wiki) processes. Currently students are not offered the How does a manual key quality process shift into the e- • Reflection (e.g. Blog) ability to review the Originality Report due to the Units are typically defined as having the following • Test / MCQ amount of training required to instruct them on how environment? We work through the assessment lifecycle of a unit Assignment mix: • Portfolio to read the report correctly. from creation of the assessments themselves, along with • 100% Coursework, Assignments that take the form of a report, essay, or Based on a small pilot study that took place in early maintenance of quality processes and procedures, through to the • 100% TCP (Time-Constrained Paper), or case study are submitted using either the VLE 2011, future developments of eAssessment and online methods and practices for ease of submission, and onto marking, • 50% Coursework / 50% TCP assignment submission or Turnitin plagiarism submission will involve careful consideration of the feedback, resubmissions and successful completion. Key detection/deterrent tool(s). possibilities added by technological advances in areas Assignments are created based on the Intended of online submission, plagiarism detection and aspirations combine preservation of quality educational standards, Learning Outcomes required for the Unit subject or Where we are able to, and according to the assignment deterrence, along with a clear indication to students of discipline, and can take the form of: type , we use plagiarism detection & deterrent benefits of usage. security of paperwork and efficacy of functionality whilst aiming to prevent additional workload falling on either tutors or students.STAKEHOLDERS PREPARATION ASSIGNMENT MARKING & FEEDBACK KEY: Important/essential stakeholder to the process. ACADEMIC OFFENCES Engaged but not essential PANEL stakeholder to the process. ASSESSMENT PASSED PROGRAMME LEADER Student proceeds to next Unit & AssessmentLEARNING TECHNOLOGIST ASSESSMENT FAILED Student completes the Resubmission Assignment ADMINISTRATOR REASSESSMENT FAILED Student repeats the Unit Displaying marks with next Student Cohort & feedback STUDENT MARKING & 2ND MARKING ACADEMIC / TUTOR Methods of marking in the online environment have often been determined by the type of submission (coursework vs. exam/TCP) and the type of tool used for submission. Experimentation and approaches have developed with prime consideration given to tutor choice. Consideration is given to 2ND MARKER requirements to print work, format of feedback (annotation within assignment, written or electronic/video feedback, summary paragraph, etc), and the breakdown and recording of marks where there are sub-elements. EXTERNAL EXAMINER STORAGE OF FEEDBACK It is essential to preserve the sequence for marking, 2nd marking SECURE ELECTRONIC SECURE ELECTRONIC ASSIGNMENT BRIEF and external examiner approval to ensure the marking policies are TECHNICAL ISSUES LATE SUBMISSION CIRCUMSTANCES LOADING TO VLE ASSIGNEMENTS RESUBMISSION 2ND MARKING INSTRUCTIONS ASSIGNMENT adhered to (e.g. marks not displayed before 2nd marking complete). SUBMISSION PREPARATION OFFENCES PANEL SUBMISSION DOWNLOAD MITIGATING OVERVIEW MARKING APPROVAL GUIDANCE EXAM BOARD STORAGE ACADEMIC Further development is required to fine-tune these processes and will be based on a coherent marking and feedback structure to standardise processes, maintain quality standards and maximise the student experience. www.bournemouth.ac.uk

eAssessment: Who's Involved?

by David Hopkins

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

1 Embed 42

Statistics

eAssessment: Who’s Involved? Presentation Transcript